English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

If not, why not?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Iraq_WMD_Declassified.pdf

http://newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/2/18/233023.shtml

2006-06-22 01:50:51 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

23 answers

I didnt really care if they had wmd they needed to be invaded anyway. Most people with brains realized they had some destructive materials even if we couldnt find it by the time we got there. They will never change their country because 95% or more of them hate us and they want to lop our infidel heads off. I am just glad Bush got in and we got some revenge for 9/11 because even though Saddam technically was not blamed I am sure he had a big party that day as he watched our fellow americans jumping from those buildings and our children burning up in the daycare centers. But I think some of our citizens felt worse for the loss of their lives than ours.

2006-06-22 02:06:30 · answer #1 · answered by pigandhorselover 2 · 0 2

TheHza, you are a jerk. Your answer couldn't be more wrong. Fox reports the news that CNN, NBC & CBS will not report on. When there is a breaking story coming out of Iraq Fox will be right at the Press Conference airing what the coalition spokesperson is briefing. They're not interjecting their opinion, just showing the briefing. When you switch to CNN they're talking about Brangelina's baby. Switch to NBC and Matt Lauer is sitting there asking questions to no one that the briefer on Fox just answered. When the other networks finally cover the breaking news they throw in a negative sound bite and build the story up with as much negativity as possible. Sorry, I prefer listening to facts and formulating my own opinion rather than listening to Matt Lauer's opinion...

2006-06-22 09:23:26 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

This news comes from FOX therefore it can safely be ignored. I will wait until a reputable news source like the PA,BBC, or Reuters report it before I start contemplating believing in it. As the earlier commentator said, we already knew they had chemical weapons, so what's new?

Well done, elronhubbabubba, these republican sheep are normally grasping at any straw to justify the actions of the moron Bush. He probably only read the headline and that was enough for him.

2006-06-22 09:00:35 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Liberals will never admit that Bush was right....even if he said the Earth was round, they would disagree.
While the WMD's found is good news...they were pre-1991, and had degraded to the point where they would not have been able to be launched...and the defense dept. has stated that these are not the WMD's we went to war for.....
I am not trying to burst your bubble..I would love nothing more than to shut Bush haters up.....
This should raise questions though, obviously Hussein lied......
and the issue is not dead....Hussein clearly had the capability to destroy, and needed to be taken out.....and our work there is clearly not done....but libs won't understand that.

2006-06-22 09:49:47 · answer #4 · answered by loubean 5 · 0 0

Not to be a jerk, and I'm frankly not one of the people you referred to, but I find Fox News the least reliable news out there. It's like E!Politics division. Not much better than a gossip mag. I won't believe it til other news sources back it up. Fox has too much of an agenda. And the people that are willing to believe fox, imho, are usually just looking for ego stroking agreement of their opinions backed up with "news".
Sorry.
JRS1965, I'm sorry you think I'm a jerk. Please check Humanist's answer. There are news sources that are not NBC, CNN, or CBS. I usually get my news from several sources. That way I feel more secure about what I'm talking about than when I listen to just one. And I don't listen to Fox, ever. You're right- they do report on things "no one else reports on". But I fail to see the charm in that.

2006-06-22 08:57:17 · answer #5 · answered by TheHza 4 · 0 0

We went to war because he was "pursuing weapons of mass destruction". If you read the whole story, the weapons found were pre-1991 and "a senior Defense Department official pointed out that the chemical weapons were not in useable conditions." Try reading the whole story, not just the headlines.

therandman: I'll let you know when I actually hear it...

2006-06-22 08:55:08 · answer #6 · answered by john_stolworthy 6 · 0 0

There is nothing that will change their minds. Al Qaeda could come to Broadway and cut off the head of every person in NYC and these socialists cowards would come up with the same lame drivel to defend them.

2006-06-22 08:55:01 · answer #7 · answered by freetyme813 4 · 0 0

U forgot to say that they found tons of DEPLETED URANIUM also,that is considered WMD,cause its poiseness and radio active,
BUT ITS THE AMERICAN TERRORIST ARMY WHO BROUGHT IT TO IRAQ,usa USED IT AS A WEAPON IN THE WAR
Also ,if u think that those useless shells found was a good reason to attack & invade IRAQ & kill all these innocent ppl,
So,how many times do u think america & israel should be invaded & destroyed for the thousands of WMD they have?
WAKEEE UPPP

2006-06-22 09:13:29 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Change minds? You have to have one to change it don't you? Isn't going to happen, heck they could find a nuclear bomb depot and the Bush basher would say it was planted. They'd hate him even if he solved world hunger, found the AIDS vaccine and established a orphanage in Africa. If he doesn't do what they want they way they want it he's an idiot in their book period.

2006-06-22 09:59:10 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

So they found a couple hundred shells with degraded mustard gas in them. Mustard gas was invented in WWI. According to the pentagon these shells weren't in usable condition. There is no story here.

2006-06-22 09:02:10 · answer #10 · answered by joe 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers